Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Federal workers to get pay raise in 2013 and union is saying raise is not enough

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 8, 2012, 1:29 p.m. EST by Wallgreed (-26)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Federal working employees with some already making 75,000 + per year are going to get a pay raise of 5% in 2013. Yet the union is crying this is not enough and does not meet cost of living standards. Unions need to go. http://www.fedsmith.com/article/3255/proposed-pay-increase-federal-workers-2013.html

60 Comments

60 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by FedupWorker (3) 1 year ago

It is only .5% not 5%.. and now they (congress) wants to use us as scapegoats again and freeze our salary till 2014. I don't know where you come up with your 75000+ figure but most of us here make under 50k and our salary has been frozen 2+ years but our insurance rates and other expenses have gone up just tlike everyone else..

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Are you from FLAKESnews?

Everything you've said is a LOOOOOOng stretch, based on something written over a year ago.

Unions should stay, it's YOU who should go..

[-] 2 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

Stick to the truth! I guess your argument can't stand without lies.

Let's support all workers getting higher wages. Fed workers frequently lead the way for private workers when it comes to benefits, & salary levels.

So fed worker progress helps all workers.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21069) 2 years ago

Yes. Those greedy workers are going to buy new cars and put their kids through college with that $375. That is what it comes out to on $75,000 because the increase is not 5% it is .5% or one-half of one percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/white-house-proposes-05-percent-pay-increase-for-federal-workers/2012/01/06/gIQA18fyeP_blog.html

[-] 1 points by gsw (2697) 1 year ago
[-] 1 points by adhlh2000 (1) 2 years ago

.5% actually get your facts right so in a 4 year span that is 1.5% in 2010, 0% in 2011, 0% in 2012 and .5% in 2013. Averaged out to about .4% increase. Those pesky federal workers sure are being over compensated in this down economy

[-] 1 points by eliza2cute (1) 2 years ago

Federal employees shouldn't be targeted just because they signed up to work for the federal government. Anybody can get a job with the government, if you have the qualifications. That means college degree, military or private sector experience in the particular job you are applying for. Those who have government jobs just didn't go to Washington, stand in line and get one for free. They applied for the job, got hired, took an oath to support the constitution of the US and are paid for the jobs they do. Most of the jobs are average wages, the benefits are good but the vacation time depends on how many years you have, much like private sectors. There are no company cars, box seats at the ball games, complementary cruises, free company dinners, etc. Most of the jobs require handling classified or sensitive information. If you have any sort of police record, bad credit = no security clearance and no government job. .05% doesn't amount to very much in the paychecks, especially after taxes are taken out. Oh yes, federal employees do pay the same taxes just like everyone else. Stop the rumors and check the facts before you bash the federal employees. They are middle class citizens who work just like anybody else and shouldn't have to be criticized just because the work for the government. Oh, and BTW, check out the salaries of contractors like Lockheed, General Dynamics, Bell Helicopter, etc. etc. They are making TWICE what the federal employees are and you can bet they don't get their pay frozen. Oh, and who pays those contractors salaries? Right - the TAXPAYERS!

[-] 1 points by 4TheHumanSocietyProject (504) 2 years ago

Capitalism is for the weak.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Vooter (441) 2 years ago

Yeah, so what? I thought the whole point of capitalism was to make as much money as possible--now you're telling us it's not?

[-] 0 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

I am not against making as much as possible, just against the crooked unions

[-] 1 points by Vooter (441) 2 years ago

LOL...but you're okay with the crooked banks, right?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Still flaky after all these hours?

Ask you doctor if Nizarol A-D (OTC) is right for you.

Also available in prescription strength.

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

Is that what you are on?? I pass buddy that stuff is all yours

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I'd say we should be more critical of unions, but they've certainly fought for workers rights, and we have much to thank them for (but again, this fact alone does not immunize them from valid criticism). I wonder why unions have all but given up on trying to unionize Walmart workers (and overall, workers who could benefit from unionization the most), while focusing on groups of workers who need unions the least (it's a very weird situation).

[-] 2 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 2 years ago

As long as Walmart is willing to close successful stores down (and they have) rather than have even a small group of employees unionize, the unions are stymied.

Where I am, WM has been fined repeatedly for violating child labor laws, but the fines are so meager that they just keep doing it. Ditto for other wage-and-hour violations. The laws have been influenced in their favor far too much.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I bet they won't be willing to close ALL their stores. This is OUR fucking country, not Walmart's ....

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 2 years ago

The threat has been quite effective in keeping its employees from even considering a union. They don't have to close all of them, just produce enough intimidation.

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

That's the way I see it to. Years ago it only took four people to form a union

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Right, and the more corruption grows the more people it takes to combat it ... so we need people (but I'm confident we can convince people, although I'm an eternal optimist, and even if I suffer from some degree of naivety, I refuse to succumb to it--as long as I breath).

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

same here

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 2 years ago

Government workforces were cut by 220,000 last year. Much of that work is now being done by those left. Those left are getting fewer raises and benefits.

Right-wing assholes say that this is not enough.

Unemployment today would be nearer to 6% if not for all of the government contraction.

The economy would be growing much faster if it had those 220,000 middle-class jobs supporting it rather than those people being on unemployment.

[-] 1 points by valfather (286) 2 years ago

$75,000 in the DC area doesn't go all that far. I grew up in the DC suburbs in a house that now would cost $600,000 or more. Rent for a one room apartment can easily go to $1400/mo, and that's not for a high-end unit.

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

maybe so but Fed workers do not all live in DC

[-] 1 points by valfather (286) 2 years ago

The Federal Reserve bailed out the banksters to the tune of $50,000 per every man woman and child in the country, and you are pissing an moaning about a few middle class Americans getting a pay raise. Get a life!

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

but when my broker goes to lunch, his martinis cost $25

[-] -1 points by freewriterguy (882) 2 years ago

They arent a middle class american if they get their pay from the government, truth be told they are a government bum and no different than someone on welfare. Spoken with boldness from the self reliant side of america.

[-] 1 points by valfather (286) 2 years ago

Stay off the highways. The federal government created them.

[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 2 years ago

if the federal government would let me ride my horse whereever I want, the way god created them, I would, but the government even took that right away from me. hell i cant even own a horse, cause the government said and i quote, "unless you are millionaire you cant own a horse" in their laws, not really but its the same thing, where can i own a horse at on gods green earth unless i pay a man a million dollars, or risk losing everything cause i go against zoning ordinances?

[-] 1 points by valfather (286) 2 years ago

All those millionaire Amish.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

There's always Outer Mongolia.

I hear you don't even have to keep a jumbo pooper scooper in your saddle bags.

You and your horse can poop wherever you want!!!

Paradise................:)

[-] -1 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

were you born this stupid or do you work at it?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

Amen. It's clear the largest part of the federal government does indeed need walking papers.

[-] -1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

I am pissing and moaning about the unions more than anything else

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Like all (R)epelicans, you're a whiny kinda guy.

[-] 1 points by valfather (286) 2 years ago

Which union specifically?

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21069) 2 years ago

Excuse me, but it is a .5% (point five percent) increase. That means one-half of one percent. Maybe you should take this thread down.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/white-house-proposes-05-percent-pay-increase-for-federal-workers/2012/01/06/gIQA18fyeP_blog.html

[-] 1 points by valfather (286) 2 years ago

Leave it stand to speak for itself.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21069) 2 years ago

Nah.

[-] 1 points by valfather (286) 2 years ago

What makes no sense to me is that a contractor employee making $75,000/year is probably billed at twice that. It's the fat-cat execs and owners who rake in the big bucks. And in the realm of many government contracts, there really isn't that much overhead. Many of us are working from home these days. Others work at the customer's site, so the overhead is on the customer (government).

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21069) 2 years ago

Right. That's why to say that a .5% increase is a 5% increase really pisses me off.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Karl?

Why is it that you think only you, deserve to make money?

Could it because of your FLAKESnews fortified brain?

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

Unions are job killers and should be abolished. All Federal, Public and Private must go

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Get your facts straight: Unions CREATED the middle class. Nearly ALL of the laws that protect you on the job are because of intense, sometimes bloody union efforts to get them for you. ALL of the benefits you enjoy on the job are a DIRECT result of union pressure exerted for decades.

You ungrateful twit.

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

Unions are becoming like the dinosaur!!!! distinct

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Distinct?

Your work rights are becoming weaker and weaker too. Guess you must like that.

Unions protect workers. the banks klled jobs. The banks created the foreclosure crisis. the banks collapsed the economy. THey caused the recession, which has cost about 14 million jobs.

Yet somehow you blame the unions.

Do you wipe your ass every time you sneeze, too?

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

Labor Unions committed suicide the day Regan fired the air traffic controllers.

I know of no union workers who walked off their jobs that very second, day or even week because of it.

At that time, the Labor Unions had the power to lock down the country and keep it that way. Not now and likely never again.

No federal employees should ever be allowed to have labor unions, especially when the taxpayers have ZERO say in their pay rates or salary negotiations.

It's plain wrong. The Treasury Department has always had a labor union. It's workers are very often vulgarly overpaid. Now do you understand why citizen paid employees should not be able to form unions against those who ARE FORCED to pay their salaries?

Publicly paid jobs should be raffled to those in the contest who can prove they meet the advertised qualifications. No labor unions for those jobs unless the people can terminate them.

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Public workers should not be required to be slaves any more than private sector workers. Until teachers organized a union they were being paid about $5000 per year in today's dollars.

Labor Unions committed suicide the day Reagan fired them? No, murder is not suicide. Reagan locked them out. He deliberately destroyed that union.

Your focus is backwards. Unions created the middle class. The 1%, not the unions, has been steadily destroying it.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

Regan threw down the gauntlet and EVERY UNION WORKER FAILED when they did not shut down the nation.

You have it backwards and a labor union which is OPPOSING the citizens who are FORCED to pay but have NO SAY in the bargaining is wrong.

This has NOTHING to do with labor union's historical role.

Open you mind to maybe your local small town police department forming a union which seemingly says, we're holding you hostage and you'll pay us more, or else.... and you'll not know what we make or have access to our records.

Sell that elsewhere. Take my money and only offer me the notion that I should blindly trust?

Nah, there's been far too much of that already.

I am not opposed to labor unions nor am I opposed to right to work states and think every state should be.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I am VERY opposed to "right to work" states. They are nothing more than right to be slaves sates. They undermine the rights of unions by bleeding them dry.

Your analogue is flawed. Government workers do NOT hold the taxpayers hostage. Their unions are subject to the same rules of arbitration as everyone else's is. And for the most part, they have virtually no right to strike.

Not allowing some group, ANY group to unionize is insuring their subservience to the whim of their masters. That is, on the face of it, unethical.

Finally, your animus towards public workers unions betrays a lack of appreciation of all they do. It is built on evidence-free assumptions about public workers integrity and productivity. They provide the skills and services necessary for the operation of civil society. They teach your kids, pick up your garbage (sometimes those two are the same thing) build your roads, inspect your water, guard your national treasures, keep your airways safe from threat, license your electricians and do a thousand other, often invisible things you take for granted.

They have a right to negotiate for a fair wage for the work they do. That's all a union is: an collection of people who negotiate collectively to make sure they aren't turned into slaves. That's everyone's right. And no one should have the right to take that away from them or anyone else.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 2 years ago

We are from different planets.

Work for me and come tell me "the group" wants to unionize against me and I replace the whole crew right now.

However, it's never happened and I do not, nor will I ever employ wounded or weak gazelles incapable of dealing with me, one on one.

There is no use continuing this discussion. We'll never agree and I'd never hire you.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

If you would fire everyone for wanting a union, you would be up in front a judge faster that you could say "Herbert Hoover". It is illegal, pure and simple.

(And, btw, I would never work for you.)

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

How so Karl?

In your FLAKESnews fortified brain, do you believe it was unions that destroyed the auto industry?

Yes Karl, in your FLAKESnews induced dementia, I believe you do.

In your Limbaugh induced loonyness, you believe many distortions and out and out untruths.

You have become what you claim to watch......................................................................................................................A flake.

[-] 0 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

Hey Libby go to Detroit, Saginaw, Flint Mi and look at the industrial parks, most of them are mainly just slabs where once major factories stood. Unions drove the auto factories out by continuing to increase the pay and benifits for the blue collared workers. Unions protect the lazy man

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

I told you, you're a flake.

Thanks for proving it.

Not a shred of truth from this flake.

Just a dose of RupertRuch juice, not the tiniest bit of nutrition.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21069) 2 years ago

He can't even get his facts straight. It is .5 % not 5%. I'm waiting for him to either fix the post or take it down.

[-] 0 points by wigger (-48) 2 years ago

This is why we do what we do! Our federal workers and the unions are what our protests are all about. Our brothers and sisters were the beneficiaries of all the stimulus. Police, teachers, firemen, all the county, city, federal and state workers must be protected above all!

[-] -2 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

I really don't understand you OWS ppl. On one hand you say that BIG corporations are exploiting the workers and on the other hand you also dont want unions. Well I am a fan of unions either but then I am a evil (and smart) capitalist as well.

On one hand you want banks and telecom operators to be nationalized and on the other u begrudge whatever little our government employees earn. Seriously I am confused. How can you guys contradict yourself so much?

The way I see it you guys are pretty much jealous of anyone that makes more money than you. Not healthy dude.

[-] 1 points by Wallgreed (-26) 2 years ago

I am not a OWS member

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

That goes without saying, Karl.

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

OWS happens to be very pro-union. It's one of the reason I support them.